Do you ever start to offer an opinion, only to remember you’ve already said it ten times before? After hundreds of posts on this blog it begins to feel as though the world is out of events that haven’t already been pre-explained. I suppose we haven’t yet covered the earthquake swarm / super volcano, though that can be corrected immediately: Minorities and BLTs hardest hit; racist republicans fail to provide acceptable catering.
Though more pertinent to the past, I wanted to return to the Las Vegas shooting. At this point I am extremely skeptical that authorities have released all they actually know. I say this because the massacre was an act of extraordinary meticulousness and precision. This was not random or a sudden “snapping,” but rather a manifestation of well-cultivated fanaticism. And fanatics are rarely reticent in describing their motives. So where is the manifesto? Where are the furious online comments?
I have even contemplated predictable movie plots. Was Paddock actually nothing more than what he seemed: a shiftless, childless retiree pissing away his last years staring at high dollar slot machines with a freeze-dried asian on his lap? If so, how on Earth does this translate to such extraordinarily murderous zeal? Is it possible he was a patsy? Could it be that some poor schmuck was simply enticed (or taken) to the real sniper(s) firebase for use as a dead decoy? I don’t know, but I’m certain Paddock has been an inconveniently close-lipped assassin.
But what I more wanted to discuss was the left’s reflex action in the wake of these killings. It was a thing of morbid astonishment to immediately see twitter hashtags of #whiteprivilege attached to the shooting of 500+ whites. Rarely has privilege seemed so luxurious. Maybe liberals were aggrieved that local emergency rooms received surviving victims ahead of Hondurans with foot calluses. Being attended to by medical infrastructure your taxes have paid for is privileged indeed.
Though beyond the bellowing and instantaneous white hatred came a cacophony of gun control calls. The most enterprising leftists took the occasion to combine both: fewer guns and whites! Newsweek leaped into the effort reminding us that white men have committed more mass shootings than any other group. I wonder what percentage of mass shootings mestizos commit in Mexico? Well, Newsweek does not wonder. But the point is that white people are responsible for some significant percentage of crime in white countries. And that’s a newsworthy item. Below are a few examples:
And here is where I descend into rank repetition. As stated previously in these pages, it is not a compliment, and should not be a goal, for white majorities to say they commit a small minority of the crimes in their own country. That is, in fact, a sure sign of their own descent into gibbering madness. The ideal percentage of crimes committed by any host society is 100%. This means their criminal franchise is entirely endogenous, which itself means they have imported no crime whatsoever. And wouldn’t the optimal number of imported violent criminals be zero? China and Japan certainly think so.
But instead of being treated as so obvious as to be obtuse, citations of white crime in a white country are used as tacit (and increasingly explicit) justification to attack whites. That they should be replaced with populations having far greater violent impulses is of no consequence at all. Thus the demand is to either have societal heaven or don’t complain when we make it hell.
But saying 10 is the same as 90 because neither is 100 is a stupidly transparent ruse. Fortunately for the left, there’s no deficit of stupid people. So let’s import the most prolifically violent populations in the world to push the white crime ratio into something that doesn’t injure our refined sensibilities. Hey, there’s practically no white gun violence at all in Zimbabwe. Mugabe must really be on to something.